Miracle, mixed blessing, or Hail Mary pass?

By Meredith L. Dias

What can magazine editors take away from the recent demise and subsequent resurrection of Editor and Publisher? While news reports associate Editor and Publisher with the newspaper industry, the publication is a trade magazine; therefore, news of the magazine's resurrection is significant to newspaper and magazine editors alike. Embedded in this saga are valuable lessons regarding the volatility of mastheads during uncertain economic times, shrinking editorial staffs and growing workloads, and the importance of editors getting involved in their publications' print and online decision-making.

About two weeks ago, the news broke that magazine publisher Duncan McIntosh Company, Inc., had purchased the recently defunct Editor and Publisher. The new owner plans to produce a February 2010 print issue; thus, despite the disruption caused by last month's closure, Editor and Publisher will not skip a single issue.

Like a lot of publications hit hard by the publishing crisis, Editor and Publisher's editorial department has taken a hit. With the promotion of editor-at-large Mark Fitzgerald to editor comes the dismissals of top editor Greg Mitchell and senior newsroom editor Joe Strupp. According to Mitchell in his January 19th Huffington Post article ["How I Lost My Job (Thanks for Asking)"], "This would bring the size of the editorial staff down to four from six."

The dismissals of Greg Mitchell and Joe Strupp raise an important question: How can editors safeguard their jobs in this uncertain climate? Perhaps the only thing they can do is get involved with their publications' print and online decision-making. If they can succeed in changing reader preferences that would lead to new sources of ad revenue, perhaps they can help bring their publications out of this economic Dark Age.

Many of you are probably all too familiar with editorial department downsizing. Few newsrooms and editorial departments have been immune to staffing changes during this joint global recession and publishing crisis. The downsizing of Editor and Publisher's editorial staff, however, accompanies a planned increase in editorial pages for the magazine. We spoke with new owner Duncan McIntosh via email, and he told us that "the cheapest thing we can do to improve the quality of Editor and Publisher is to give our editors the pages they need to write about the newest trends in production without cutting back on the newsroom. It comes down to a few extra pages on a printing press."

Thus, the new incarnation of the magazine will increase its editorial pages while reducing its editorial staff. This is hardly anomalous in today's publishing world, where editors everywhere are facing heavier workloads with smaller staffs.

There is some debate over what the change in ownership means for the future of newsroom and editorial coverage in the magazine. Various press releases have indicated that the magazine will shift its focus away from newsroom and editorial issues and toward business and technology topics. In his email, McIntosh tells us that "a lot of information being circulated isn't necessarily correct. ... The only changes you can expect to see is that there will be more information on the digital side of the equation, but not at the expense of the newsroom." However, the New York Times claims in its January 15th edition that McIntosh told them that "he wanted to shift Editor & Publisher's focus toward the business and technology of the industry, with less emphasis on what happens in newsrooms." Former editor Greg Mitchell chimed in on this same point in a late-January email to us: "Duncan McIntosh made it clear to me that they planned to focus almost entirely on the business and printing/tech aspects of newspapers," he said. Mitchell cites the discontinuation of the "newsroom-oriented blog, E&P Pub," as an example of this shift away from journalistic coverage.

Mitchell's implication seems to be that McIntosh thinks there's more ad money to be had with publishers than editors. McIntosh himself, however, tells us he believes that publishers aren't spending any more on equipment than editors right now. What's more, Mitchell himself points out that it is editors who are spending money and participating in purchasing decisions regarding computers and software, and on other products and services related to the move toward digital.

In Mitchell's late-January email to us, he states that the magazine's publisher, Charles McKeown, "has long claimed that newsroom people 'do not buy things' so they are allegedly no help in getting advertising. Of course, this is a tragic misreading, since editors -- especially Web editors -- have so much say in what gets purchased most today: software, other digital tools and equipment, everything related to the Web." The future of magazine advertising, he argues, lies with digital and Web products. "On the other hand: What do you think the future of the printing press looks like?" he asks. It is a question that all publication editors should be asking.

McIntosh's online strategy seems to be geared more toward ushering readers into the digital age. "We are redesigning and building a new website with an eye to allowing readers to post individual stories," he reports. "That site will take a couple of months to go live so in the meantime we're doing the best that we can to work with the very limited site that we have. The blogs are part of our plan as we go forward." What is most significant about this online strategy is the apparent introduction of user-generated content (UGC) to the website, the same concept that propelled YouTube, Wikipedia, Photobucket, Wordpress, and others to Internet superstardom. Promoting such a change in reader habits and preferences is important when the publishing industry is in a state of flux and struggling to keep up with current technology, and when more and more sites are employing various forms of UGC.

All eyes are on Editor and Publisher as it makes this transition. Can the revamped publication help rescue the industry it serves, thus saving thousands of editorial jobs nationwide? With the planned increase in business and technology content, will this iconic publication uphold its titular promise: to provide content of value to editors and publishers? Whether or not the magazine succeeds in these two areas, Editor and Publisher's roller coaster of a month has taught us a lot as editors. Our purchasing decisions, our insights and ideas, and our willingness to adapt to sometimes impossible conditions make us not only relevant to the future of publishing, but vital. Conversely, inflexibility on our part and an unwillingness to adapt can leave us out in the cold. The past month has also served as a reminder that even the most entrenched mastheads are subject to change. Even the best of us aren't invincible.

Meredith Dias is the research editor of Editors Only.

Add your comment.

Less advertising means smaller issues. In turn, many editors cram more text into less space. But what about white space? Here's what...

By Jan White

Is white space wasted space? Not if we make it work for its living. We must use it as a tool to improve the capacity of the visible page to tell our story both clearer and faster. Used to practical purpose, we don't need to invest vast swaths of emptiness for dramatic contrast. Forget conspicuous consumption. We can hardly afford the luxury of "a place for the eye to rest." Probably never will again. Instead, concentrate on servicing the readers. Use deliberately controlled bits of white space as raw material to lead them to what matters and expose the information in clear, fast, and bite-size chunks.

I'd like to offer 7 reasons for making white space "work" for you:

#1
It Makes You Look

Breaking the expected pattern draws the eye. A little unexpected emptiness in the midst of fullness produces curiosity. Where the norm is tightness, a simple square inch of gap shines out dramatically. Position that "hole" as a beacon to pull the eye to the important element you want to emphasize.

Technique: The simpler the shape (square, rectangle) the more deliberate it looks and works best. It doesn't matter whether it comes in from the outside margins or is inserted within the fabric of the story. Its job is to contrast strongly with that key point and make it stand out.

#2
It Creates Importance

Enclose the element (whether image or words) in a white frame as though it were a picture hanging on a wall. That gives special value, so the viewer's attention is concentrated on it.

Technique: The overall shape is what must be noticed first. Simple rectangles are ideal. The more complex the geometry, the less clearly does it jump off the page.

#3
It Helps the Reader Navigate

By separating elements from each other, it explains what belongs to what. That reveals the geography of the page at first glance. Keep the spaces within a story narrow, and make the space between the stories wide. Then build the pages by arranging the blocks as separated blocks.

Technique: It isn't the specific dimension of the gaps between things that matters but their comparative sizes. The normal is thin, the special is broad. The effect is created by contrast that doesn't demand excess space: Narrow vs. Just-a-bit-wider is just as effective as Wide vs. Broad.

#4
It Is a Clue to Effort

It shows how long the various bits on the page are. "Am I interested enough in this subject to invest the time and effort it probably requires?" asks the reader, who can immediately decide whether to bother to read or not. That is done with moats that are a bit wider than the normal space between columns. Normal spacing creates an expected scale of space-between. A small change in widths yields that helpful magic if it is clearly recognizable.

Technique: A simple horizontal or vertical moat is the ideal. Moats with wiggles in them are harder to recognize for what they are, so they don't work so well. Keep it simple.

#5
It Makes Stories Grow

Exploiting the fact that the publication is multi-paged, repetition of a small detail can tie individual pages into a Big Story. Recognizable
bits -- even tiny ones -- can accumulate and add up to large effect.

Technique: Whatever the size of the white space and its placement on the page, it must recur exactly the same way on the next and the next and the next. That deliberate precision makes it a noticeable characteristic and magnifies the story. Everything depends on controlled accuracy.

#6
It Adds Flexibility

Think outside the white box. Don't decry the fact that the available space is too small (which it may well be!). Consider whether a little judicious cutting of a few precious words mightn't be a good tradeoff. If the piece is so crammed that it is off-putting, nobody will read it anyway. Consider the cost/benefit ratio. Make yourself a bit of whiteness.

Technique: If you have a given space for the headline, don't regret that you can't fit a larger type size (which is every editor's knee-jerk reaction to increase shouting). It is probably much more successful set smaller and bolder within that same space because the words appear against valuable white background that also separates it from the surrounding text. The white space is a valuable hole in the wallpaper.

#7
It Is Hiding There

Tighten the type. You'll be amazed how looseness wastes space. Squeeze out the excess from between the characters and the lines. Congeal the space thus saved into a blob. Then apply it strategically.

Technique: Set the "tracking" tighter, i.e., "minus-something". Set the "interline space" (leading, ledding) narrower, and make up for the greater difficulty of reading by making the lines shorter (i.e., columns narrower). Tighten the gutter between columns. Now do the same thing with the display type.

Jan V. White, author of Editing by Design, is a publication-making guru. Janvw2 [at] aol [dot] com.

Add your comment.

Here are twelve questions to ask yourself and find appropriate answers or solutions to as you work your way through an assignment.

By Peter P. Jacobi

Have I:

--A clear sense of purpose as I dig into my story, a concept and a goal for my piece, a specific accomplishment that is meant to serve those I'm trying to reach.

--Just as clear a sense of direction for me to follow as I move along with a plan and its execution (do I know where I want to go and how, and will my reader be able to discern it?).

--Made as sure as possible that I am writing with sufficient and the best material, that the matter I have to work with is correct and will be convincing.

--Allowed my imagination to be released, so to make the most of my opportunity to entice the reader, and thereby make the reader's desire to accept what I write the equal of my desire to reach and satisfy that reader.

--Begun my story with what is most likely to encourage the reader to take the verbal journey I'm preparing, something that intrigues and also suits what is to follow.

--Built on the opening in substance, detail to detail, subtopic to subtopic, idea to idea, all into a logical structure with an architecture that's acceptable and attractive.

--Provided continuity, a sense of informational and environmental flow that makes for clarity and easy reading.

--Aimed for completeness, giving the reader a feel of such: that all his questions have been answered or that all her wants or needs have been taken care of.

--Used language in a provident versus prolix manner.

--Found the right words, those that say what I mean to say, that describe properly and excite sufficiently, that add a twist of lemon or a pinch of salt and pepper to my content.

--Edited my copy for accuracy, brevity, and clarity.

--Read my copy aloud and listened to it, this to make sure that everything on paper makes sense.

Know that by skipping any of the above, you should be prepared to accept failure.

Peter P. Jacobi is a Professor Emeritus at Indiana University. He is a writing and editing consultant for numerous associations and magazines, speech coach, and workshop leader for various institutions and corporations. He can be reached at 812-334-0063.

Add your comment.

Assessing the readability of an MSNBC.com excerpt.

This month, we assess the readability of an excerpt from the January 11, 2010, edition of MSNBC.com ("Apple May Wipe Slate Clean for New Tablet," by Jessica Mintz):

"But the mechanics of the human body may be stronger than Jobs' charisma. We tolerate devices like smart phones with their tiny screens and awkward keyboards because they're fine for what we need them for -- quick, on-the-go reading and messaging. As soon as the screen gets bigger, though, people tend to start wanting to do more with the device, such as typing longer missives, says Mark Rolston, chief creative officer for Frog Design, a firm that designed one of Apple's first computers. At that point, the limitations of small screens and the lack of a real keyboard could be intolerable, and people would move up a rung to a small laptop."

-- Word count: 112
-- Average sentence length: 28 (13, 28, 42, 29 words)
-- Words with 3+ syllables: 7 percent
-- Fog Index: (28+7) x .4 = 14 (no rounding)

The ideal Fog score is less than 12. This particular passage contains rather long sentences (13, 28, 42, and 29 words). Trimming or splitting them up would yield a score well within the ideal Fog range, as there is a fairly low percentage of long words. For instance, we might revise the passage in the following manner:

"But the mechanics of the human body may be stronger than Jobs' charisma. We accept devices like smart phones with their tiny screens and awkward keyboards. They're fine for what we need them for -- quick, on-the-go reading and messages. As soon as the screen gets bigger, though, people want to do more with the device, such as typing longer missives, says Mark Rolston, chief creative officer for Frog Design, a firm that designed one of Apple's first computers. At that point, the small screens and lack of a real keyboard might compel people to upgrade to a small laptop."

Here are the statistics for the revised sample:

-- Word count: 99
-- Average sentence length: 20 (13, 13, 13, 39, and 21 words)
-- Words with 3+ syllables: 4 percent
-- Fog Index: (20+4) x .4 = 9 (no rounding)

We have trimmed 13 words from the MSNBC version. Changing "tolerate" to "accept" and "messaging" to "messages" brings down our percentage of long words (reminder: "-es" noun endings do not count as a third syllable) to 4 percent. Our sentence length has decreased because have split the second sentence into two sentences.

Add your comment.

Comments:

"I'm not sure of the exact calculations, but using the calculator at http://simbon.madpage.com/Fog/fog.cgi, the original comes out to a Fog Index of 14.06.

The revised version above comes out to 10.00

Here's a version I came up with:

'But the mechanics of the human body may be stronger than Jobs' charisma. We accept devices like smart phones with their tiny screens and awkward keyboards. They're fine for what we use them for -- on-the-go reading and texting. When the screen gets bigger, though, people want to do more with the device, such as typing longer missives, says Mark Rolston. He's chief creative officer for Frog Design, a firm that designed one of Apple's first computers. The small screens and lack of a real keyboard might compel people to upgrade to a small laptop, he says.'

That clocks in at an even better 8.529." --Don Tepper, Editor, PT in Motion

Editor's Note: Fog scores may vary slightly depending upon the calculation tool used. We make our calculations by hand; however, there are online Fog calculators available. We suspect that the online instruments are not as sensitive to some of the Fog Index nuances (e.g., compound words and words with "-es" or "-ed" endings). Also, we do not round our final Fog score; therefore, although our edited sample weighed in at 9.6, it received a Fog score of 9.

A magazine succeeds with a well-designed package -- verbally and artfully -- to attract even a one-time visitor.

By Peter P. Jacobi

Let's say I get 150 publications. I think I do, considering the close to 100 I subscribe to and another 50 that I figure come through various memberships and contributions to non-profits. That's a lot for me to read, race, or clip through. That's a burden my mail carriers bravely, conscientiously handle those six delivery days of the week.

But so goes the life of a packrat always looking for things to write or talk or teach about, and so goes the job experience of those assigned to my street as postal dispatchers. The publishers of the magazines, papers, and newsletters I receive are compensated either by my subscription dollars or donations. The mail schleppers, unfortunately, receive little more than an occasional thanks and a holiday time fiscal gift hardly commensurate with the duties performed.

For all that, a visit to Barnes and Noble or Borders or the local independent will remind me of the countless publications I do not get at home. Sometimes, perusal leads to a purchase; something within an exhibited issue strikes my attention or suggests fulfillment of a momentary need. The drugstores have their own collections, usually of a more frivolous nature, but I'm certainly not averse to looking through a few of the publications exhibited there.

Or wherever I'm led day by day, I should add. A few weeks ago, while waiting to see my doctor for the semi-annual checkup, I chanced across the June '08 issue of Fast Company, a magazine I had seen before but that had not been the object of sufficient topical interest to be material for purchase. I happen to not be big on company/entrepreneurial publications.

But among the cover lines, I found "Cities of the Year, Why Chicago and London Are Tops." Actually, the main cover subject dealt with a young man named Alex Bogusky, a whiz from the world of advertising out to crush Apple for Microsoft. That subject didn't stir the juices, nor did the other topics flagged, save for the Chicago/London selections, which held topic potential strong enough for me to actually open the magazine.

Lo and behold, what I discovered was an editorial package designed verbally and artfully to attract even a one-time visitor. Layouts, titles, subtitles, visuals, captions, breakouts, story structures, subject variety, lengths of pieces ranging from micro to macro: all had been arranged into a savvy unit. It's a very "now" magazine, aimed at the successful or motivated-to-be young adult. And the editors, I suspect from what I saw, have found ways to attract their readers into and through the pages.

That matter of attracting, of how -- for instance -- to get stories underway for the purpose of reader seduction: that's always on my mind. Since the Fast Company copy was not mine, I turned to the Chicago and London articles quickly, this so I could glance at them before my doctor called me into her office. She soon did but not before I got a healthy start on my reading. It sharpened my interest. Fortunately, later in the day, I found a single copy at Borders and snatched it. That's why I am better prepared to tell you about my adventure with Fast Company.

A page titled "Fast Cities 2008" got the package that teased me underway, it dominated by city scenes and a preface that reads: "The great urban theorist Jane Jacobs wrote about cities of 'exuberant diversity,' and in our 2008 Cities of the Year, Chicago and London, we have two stellar examples. They -- and our 12 cities to watch -- are no utopias (we're still looking). But amid economic uncertainty, they're vibrant, creative, and growing. These hot spots, these Fast Cities, are full of life and bursting with diversity -- in race, in culture, and in business. Join us for a tour."

The text supplier for "Chicago Soul" is Alex Kotlowitz, an avid Chicagoan who authored Never a City So Real: A Walk in Chicago. The "London Calling" writer is Alice Rawsthorn, a London resident for 28 years and design critic for the International Herald Tribune. From start to finish, each reporter/writer got it right, or seems to. I have to guess with the London piece because I've only been a visitor there. I can vouch for the Chicago article since 36 years of my life were spent there.

Here's the first paragraph -- a rather long one, but juicy -- Mr. Kotlowitz applied to Chicago:

"In the bottom of the ninth inning of the 2005 World Series, as the long-suffering Chicago White Sox were about to win their first championship in 88 years, play-by-play announcer Joe Buck waxed eloquent about Chicago's South Side, where the Sox play. He described it as 'a collection of neighborhoods...Irish neighborhoods. Italian neighborhoods. Polish. Lithuanian. Firemen. Policemen. Schoolteachers. Stockyard workers.' Stockyard workers? The last stockyard closed in 1971. Irish, Italian, Polish, Lithuanian? The South side has long been predominantly African-American, and most of its immigrants now are Mexican. Yet that is how many view the city, through a lens dominated by the past. If you travel abroad and tell people you're from Chicago, they'll often pull their hands out of imaginary holsters and start shooting. To them, the city is still Al Capone's town, which it was -- nearly a century ago."

What's myth and what's actual: that is the Kotlowitz point. Is Chicago a city one can pin down so that the reason for its current state of vitality becomes clear? His is a valid approach, and an attractive one. He follows with an up-dater:

"The real Chicago isn't so easy to keep up with. It's constantly reinventing itself. Jumpy. Agitated. Impatient. It's as if the place is trembling. Move aside. Don't linger. And if you're going to dawdle, get out of the way. But what any Chicagoan will also tell you is that the past is very much present. It doesn't go away. It shouldn't. In fact, that's Chicago's lure and its beauty: its ability to take what was and figure out what could be."

An excellent approach this is, an introduction that allows Kotlowitz to begin making his case for Chicago as "City of the Year." "Consider Millennium Park," he continues, explaining how a site once dominated by ugly railroad tracks (in a rail era that made Chicago its hub) has become part of a lakefront skyline probably unequalled in the world for beauty and public usage. I'll leave it to you to hunt up the article, but, let me assure you, the "why" for Chicago's selection becomes clear and bright as the sunlight that strikes the waters of Lake Michigan on all but the cloudiest of days.

And off to the side, one finds a column of quotes from Chicagoans, such as the artist Dzine, aka Carlos Rolon: "The Chicago lakefront, Nelson Algren, Frank Lloyd Wright, Mies van der Rohe, the best place to get pizza, Michael Jordan, Barack Obama, Bill Murray, John Cusack, Lupe Fiasco, Buddy Guy, Hugh Hefner, Billy Corgan, Kanye West, Liz Phair, Bernie Mac, Jeff Tweedy, Common, Jeremy Piven, Ramsey Lewis, Pete Wentz, Studs Terkel, Frankie Knuckles, Koko Taylor, Chris Ware, Charlie Trotter, Freddy Rodriguez, Ryne Sandberg, Nate Berkus, Judy Chicago, Kerry James Marshall, Chicago Italian beef hot dogs, house music, the Second City theater -- and my father."

The CEO of Motorola, Greg Brown," adds: You can see it all get started here: life-saving drugs, new food, new technologies, new airplanes, advertising creativity." And by now, you should get sufficient clues for the why of the selection.

Alice Rawsthorn's "London Calling" begins:

"It's shockingly expensive. The roads are jammed with traffic. The subway system's hopeless, and the buses no better. There's a surveillance camera on every other corner, and the sidewalks are strewn with litter. The biggest airport is a joke. The richest residents are fleeing or threatening to; the poorest have been chased out to the suburbs by soaring property prices. And the weather sucks."

Well, that opening paragraph casts doubt on the "why" for London as choice. Rawsthorn makes the place sound bleak. But as reader, one gets the vibes that the explanatory payoff is about to come. It starts with the question we've just posed:

"Why is somewhere with so much against it such a great place for creatives to live and work?

'That's simply -- it's because London's so dynamic,' says Christopher Bailey, design director for Burberry, the once-dowdy British raincoat company that has been reinvented as a successful global fashion brand. 'Creativity thrives here. It has to do with the people, their attitude, vibrance, and energy. You can work away in your little world and have your moment in the sun. That's very empowering. I've lived and worked in New York, Paris, and Milan, but right now I can't think of another city I'd want to live in more than London.'"

The defining details begin to amass: "London has more museums than Paris, more theaters than New York, and more bars, public libraries, and music venues than either A recent edition of Time Out listed 111 plays, 190 exhibitions, 157 comedy events, 293 rock or pop performances, and 195 club nights in a single week. One in every eight Londoners -- more than 550,000 people -- work either in a creative job or in a creative industry."

Again, I ask you to look up what follows. There are lessons in the writing (not only of the two mentioned articles but throughout the issue). There are lessons about editorial choices (what to feature, what to cover extensively, what to compress, and a lot about how one can make a reader take notice).

Like a column, for instance, titled "A Dirty Shame," that covers "How marketers create disgust and embarrassment -- and why we shouldn't put up with it." The argument begins with the dreadful "Ring around the collar" commercial that used to make me cringe.

Hmm, maybe I should make Fast Company my 151st publication. I'll think about it.

Peter P. Jacobi is a Professor Emeritus at Indiana University. He is a writing and editing consultant for numerous associations and magazines, speech coach, and workshop leader for various institutions and corporations. He can be reached at 812-334-0063.

Add your comment.

There's a movement gaining strength among magazine and newspaper publishers to begin charging for online content that's now free.

By William Dunkerley

In publishing's print era, most general readers paid for content, while free, controlled circulation publications tended to serve niche markets. The Internet Age brought with it a pendulum swing that made free, advertising-supported content mainstream.

With recession-driven cuts in advertising expenditures, there are those who would like to push the pendulum back toward paid content. Innovative schemes are being devised that include collecting "micropayments." A micropayment, as defined by BusinessDictionary.com, is a "transaction in small amounts, costing a few cents to usually less than five dollars, typically involving sale of information on internet." Presumably, this would allow readers to peruse a table of contents, and then pay relatively small sums to read only those articles that seem interesting enough to warrant shelling out some money, albeit small change.

Media mogul Rupert Murdoch has been especially outspoken in his belief that future prosperity for publishing will be dependent upon selling content. "The old business model based on advertising-only is dead," he resolutely proclaimed. Murdoch seems to believe that his new pay-as-you-go model will lead to salvation of the industry.

For those of us in the editorial business, the notion that readers will be paying to see our content can have a rewarding ring to it. Our editorial product would seem to have a higher perceived value if readers are required to pay. It's like receiving an economic vote of approval.

Reviewing the Various Plans

A number of variants are emerging for how to implement the concept of paid online content. Different groups of industry players -- big shots and small fries -- are separately developing schemes to create omnibus pads or platforms that can facilitate the implementation of some form of payments and micropayments. Will individual publishers be running their own e-commerce systems, or will middlemen step in for a cut of the revenue stream? That question is yet to be answered.

For the next few issues, Editors Only will be examining the pay-for-content movement from the point of view of what it will mean for you as editors. We'll start by describing one of the proposed solutions in this article. Future issues will look at others, as well as overall ramifications and concerns. And, finally, we'll conclude the series with our own analysis of the movement.

The Brill Pad

Steven Brill, formerly editor of the now-defunct magazine Brill's Content and founder of American Lawyer magazine, is promoting a plan for "preserving valuable journalism by restoring the value proposition." He offers the plan out of a belief that "the Internet has undermined the economic model" because of what he calls a "cultural virus."

Brill told a New York conference in June:

In the history of the world no one can point to any quality journalism operation that depended only on ad revenue and, while giving its content away for free, thrived as a profitable, independent business. Not one. Ever.

That bold assertion may come as an abrasive surprise to many of you who have produced quality controlled-circulation publications over the years. Nonetheless, it is part of the premise upon which Brill has built his proposed e-commerce pad, dubbed Journalism Online, LLC.

Brill's plan involves "creating an easy way for consumers to buy content with one account across multiple websites and eliminating millions in capital expenses for these hard-pressed publishers by supplying this robust, completely flexible e-commerce engine."

Journalism Online would market "all you can read" packages that might cost, say, $30 per month. They would be in effect a passport that would allow you to read everything that is offered by the publications affiliated with Journalism Online. Smaller payments would get you smaller passports, i.e., an ability to read only content from a single publisher, or stories on a single topic from multiple publishers. You might pay $10 per month for such limited access.

Brill says he expects his system will induce between 8 to 15 percent of a publication's online visitors to pay for at least some of the content that they view. The balance of page views would remain free in order to be supported by advertising revenue.

A consumer would register once with Journalism Online and then have access to all the publications that are affiliated with Journalism Online. Each publication would set the prices for viewing its own content. A payment could cover an annual or monthly subscription, or just one article. In addition to magazines and newspapers, Brill expects to include bloggers who produce original content.

Will enough publishers and bloggers sign up with Journalism Online for it to really take off? Brill says he doesn't believe that a critical mass will be necessary -- and besides, he reports that he has well-known attorneys David Boies and Ted Olson helping with negotiations. What's more, Brill adds, "If a newspaper or magazine doesn't think some significant portion of its content ... is unique enough to get some people -- maybe 10 percent -- to want to pay for it, then why are they paying journalists to produce it?"

Because of some of Brill's controversial-sounding rationales for his proposed e-commerce pad, we would have preferred that he describe them here in Editors Only himself. We invited him to do so. But after initial expressions of interest, he found himself unwilling to subject his prose to our standard editorial treatment.

William Dunkerley is editor of Editors Only.

Add your comment.